23
Article 4(2) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to
the detriment of Mr. Raxcacó Reyes.
50.
In relation to Article 4(6) of the Convention, the representatives indicated
that the Guatemalan Congress revoked the decree regulating the domestic procedure
regarding requests for clemency. Despite the legal vacuum, Mr. Raxcacó Reyes’
defense lawyer applied for a pardon before the Ministry of Governance on May 19,
2004. This request has not been decided to date. According to the representatives,
the State violated Article 4(6) of the American Convention by failing to decide on the
request for clemency and by not establishing a legal procedure for processing such
petitions.
Arguments of the State
51.
Regarding Article 4(1) of the American Convention, the State argued that:
(a)
It recognizes the fundamental right of the individual to the protection
of his life and that he should not be deprived of it arbitrarily; and
(b)
A court does not impose the death penalty mandatorily, but conducts
the respective assessment of all the elements of evidence submitted by the
parties and determines the punishment to be imposed on each guilty party.
52.
Regarding Article 4(2) of the Convention, the State indicated that:
(a)
The death penalty is a punishment established and recognized by
Guatemalan constitutional law, and the cases in which this punishment may
not be imposed are regulated by law;
(b)
The death penalty is a punishment that should only be imposed in
special circumstances; it is established for specific crimes, allowing the court
to decide on its application, if it considers that the circumstances in which the
crime was committed reveal the greater or special dangerousness of the
perpetrator;
(c)
When delivering judgment, the Sixth Court for Criminal Sentencing,
Drug-Trafficking and Environmental Crimes indicated that the imposition of
the death penalty for the crime of kidnapping or abduction did not violate
Article 4 of the Convention, because this punishment was established in
Article 201 of the Penal Code, before the ratification of the American
Convention in 1978; and
(d)
The reform of Article 201 of the Penal Code “entailed a clear violation
of the provisions of Article 4(2) of the American Convention on Human Rights,
because it established the death penalty as the principal punishment and 25
to 50 years of imprisonment as the secondary punishment.”
53.
In relation to Article 4(6) of the Convention, the State indicated that it
recognized that a pardon is the final remedy that can be granted to a person
sentenced to death. It also recognized the existing legal vacuum, because the Penal
Code regulates the pardon but there are no legal regulations to make this effective.
To remedy this vacuum, it stated that it was developing a proposal to present a draft
law to Congress to regulate the procedure for pardons.
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents